Assassin’s Creed Syndicate: Ubisoft & Their Lack of Innovation

ASidCast, "Ubisoft had my good will for the most part, till now anyway. Syndicate, honestly, seems like the same old Assassin's Creed all over again whereas Ubisoft themselves would love to say how the next game in their franchise is going to be a game changer but let's face it, it's not."

You know what it is okay to borrow elements from other games if it makes their game better. Complaining about a rope launcher being similar to the one seen in Arkham City or the swappable characters being seen in other games before isn't really an issue at all. These types of things are a positive thing to see as it shows Ubisoft are trying to expand and improve on the series. That is as long as it works

This doesn't mean I am excited for the next AC. I am not excited because I know how the story will pan out. Ubisoft need to prove to me that they are taking the story telling seriously this time around.

In the beginning of the article I mentioned how improving on mechanics after borrowing them or stealing them (whichever word you prefer) from other games is actually a good thing but Ubisoft for the most part at this point is basically shoe horning features in just for the sake of putting said features into the game. Character swapping isn't available inside missions and only in freeroam and each mission you'll have to play only via one character for example. It's not improving on a mechanic, it's downgrading a mechanic if anything...

Are you serious? So rather than thinking "hmm, you can swap characters in this game? Cool, you couldn't do that before" you're thinking "You can only swap characters in this game at this time? Pfff, Ubisoft don't know how to innovate to save their life."

Geez, people like you bring a new definition to the term jaded. I bet you loved Shadow of Mordor even though it basically ripped its combat from Arkham, and its stealth from both Watch Dogs and Assassin's Creed and did NOTHING to change them. But it was great right?

At this point, you know exactly what Ubisoft wants you to know about the game, you don't know its entirety, and you're already saying it lacks innovation. People like you are the problem. You shoot down a game from the onset, the very first reveal of the game and you've canned it. That's why gamers are seen as entitled whiners.

I mean, Ubisoft literally can't win with you people. They put in something that's never been in the AC games before and you b****, if they didn't put them in, you'd b****. Save yourselves and the rest of us the b****ing and just don't buy the game and ignore everything about it.

Totally agree. True innovation only comes through incremental iteration. Anyone still crying for some huge leap will ultimately be met w/ a broken & buggy mess, per what we have seen over & over this gen already w/ games that try to shoehorn in new things that ultimately subtract more from an experience than they add. You want to know what a big innovation would be for the AC series in my eyes? A story that makes any kind of sense whatsoever. If Syndicate finally tries to deliver a compelling story that isn't bogged down by trying to move the ball down the field in the smallest & stupidest of ways, if theres a story in Victorian England w/ those characters & not some ridiculous time spanning cyber adam & eve stupidity, that'd be the biggest innovation for the series since the introduction of the hay stack.

>these types of things are a positive thing to see as it shows Ubisoft are trying to expand and improve the series

That's a negative, Ghost Rider. It's just adding another minimum effort one game gimmick, rather than actually expanding and progressing the gameplay. Same thing they've been doing for the last few years.

Revelations had the hook blade and "defend the castle" missions. AC3 got rid of that and added hunting and that "rope weapon." AC4 got rid of that and heavily featured sailing. ACU got rid of that and... etc, etc.

"Apparently in Syndicate, once you go into stealth, you keep your hat somewhere and pull the iconic Assassin hood over your head… and that’s apparently the Assassin being stealthy. This is just ridiculous at this point, even more so than Clark Kent removing his glasses and no one being able to tell the difference between him and Superman."

Lately, AC hasn't been very innovative. It has just felt like more of the same. So I no longer use gameplay as a deciding factor to buy these.

I've been looking at this: Do I like the main character(s)? Do I like the setting? Does the story interest me?

With rogue, the story interested me and the main character interested me. But the setting just felt like more of AC4, so I haven't been in the mood to play it, even though I own the game.

With unity, the story doesn't really interest me, the setting doesn't really interest me either. But the characters interest me a little bit. I got a decent way through before getting completely bored.

So far from what I have seen with Syndicate, I don't really know the main characters enough to say if they interest me or not. Same with the story. But I really like the Victorian England feel (one reason why I really liked BloodBorne).

Honestly, Ubisoft hasnt successfully innovated in years. AC has been rehashed almost as often as COD has. Splinter Cell was killed off by innovating poorly. They removed the tense, realistic and stealth oriented complexion the series had and replaced it with more of a "thriller/24" vibe that comes off corny and uninspired. Ghost Recon died with Future Soldier when they, again, went for a more fast-paced thrill ride experience rather than the realistic, tense, and complex gameplay that the GRAW series offered. Rainbow 6 is finally seeing a new entry some 5+ years later. However, from what I have seen, they have taken away some very important aspects. There is no campaign to my understanding which is a major sin in itself. The graphics and sound effects seem dated. The gameplay seems nice, but the rounds are too short and the gadgets are too advantageous. (By advantageous I mean that they do too much for the player rather than having the player learn about enemy locations and other intel). The rounds being too short forces people to play like they're playing COD. They have to rush the objective rather than sit back, be tactical, and plan an attack. Also, the maps seemed small. I would much rather see a neighborhood full of houses rather than just one house. I would rather see an airport in its entirety rather than just one plane. ANYWAYS, all I'm saying is that Ubisoft has disappointed a large portion of its fanbase over the course of the last few years. And them dangling The Division in front of our faces is only going to hurt them when it finally releases and it's nothing like they promised it would be. We will just have to wait and see......E3 will hopefully renew my hope in this company. It used to be my favorite. You couldnt get me away from Tom Clancy games.

Agreed classic clancy was the best,splinter cell pt/ct vs is the most fun i ever had on xbl....but they (ubi) decided it was better to totally butcher all clancy games to the point everyone of their fan's gave up buying anything with tom clancys name on it.

I cant think of any other franchise apart from resident evil that destroyed its innovative gameplay so much in favour of cod style repetitve no brainer,button bashing action,action,action!!!!,serio usly i used to love ubisoft games back in 2000_2005,but fast foward to 2007- present and the name ubisoft just means broken unoriginal seen it all before garbage.

This is so true. Assassin's creed is just like cod at this point. They release the same game every year. Black flag was probably the last AC game I ever get. Sad, they've made some great games in this series, but it's becoming recycled garage.

It's not that the series is lacking in innovation, it's just that almost everyone by this point has been burned out by the yearly release, that no matter how big the changes are, it still feels like the same old game.

I've played every AC game. Honestly some are good and others are bad. They've actively changed some eliments for traversial and combat and yet still people are compaining. I swear, instead of complaining like a small child why don't you accept that they have to keep the core AC vibe to it. If they change everything, they may as well change the name as well. Cod, halo, bf, arkum, streetfighter, mortal kombat, mario, zelda just to name a few change things every game, but keep the core experience the same for a reason... The fans! I see sports fans complain about coachs, car enthusiasts complain about cars, and gamers complain about games. If you want to change a game to fit what you want that is fine, go to school, start an indie firm, go to kickstarter, and make the hame you want. Let's see how innovative you can be... But after make a sequel with out keeping the core of the experience intact and make sure you don't borrow from other games. Also never mind the complaining from the fans, insults, and death threats.. Come on all yee arm chair developers, programers, coachs, reporters, enthusiasts, and what ever else you may always think you know best about. Let the world see what you all can do other than run your mouths and complain about every aspect of everything that you really know nothing about and aren't eilling to learn. I read all these articles and all these comments so I finaly created an account to say possituve things. I liked ac4 and even with it's flaws I liked the tweeks in unity. Now if they can get it right in syndicate they'll have a great game I think. But unless you've actually played it, can I ask you something. Why are you running down a game when you know nothing about it other than a very short video?!